Archive for agosto \31\UTC 2009

PRaaS, Process as a Service

agosto 31, 2009

Um interessante post do blog Enterprise 2.0, de Louis Naugés, localizado no www.zdnet.fr!

==========
PRaaS, Process as a Service

Publié le 30 août 2009

(Version anglaise, modifiée, d’un texte publié auparavant en Français.)

Yes, I know; another .aas acronym!
Why talk about PRaaS? What are the differences with SaaS solutions? This is what I will discuss now.

PRaaS, PRocess as a Service: attempt of a definition

Reading a recent post on the excellent blog of my friend Phil Wainewright was the trigger that helped me formalize an idea that I have worked on for many years.

Service Channel for PRaaS In his post “Thinking Beyond SaaS As We Know It”, Phil referred to “Service Channel“, a company which provides the management of a complex process in the Cloud: the outsourcing of cleaning and maintenance services for organizations that are geographically distributed.

What are the skills that were needed to create “Service Channel”?
– An IT team to build this service in the Cloud; yes, of course, but … this is not essential!
– First and foremost, a team of professionals in the field of channel services, knowing all its specific characteristics and complexities, which was able to create a “service” that could be used by thousands of companies.
This is one of the key points of “Service Channel” competitiveness, which you can read on their website: “Every member of our team has a deep understanding of the challenges that facility managers and contractors face every day …

“Service Channel” is a good example of what could be called a PRaaS, PRocess as a Service!

I therefore propose a first definition of a PRaaS:
PRaaS has four basic characteristics:
– A service available on the Cloud.
– Provides a complete solution to manage an entire process.
– Targets not only an organization but also its external stakeholders, customers, suppliers or providers.
– Can be used directly by business professionals, without requiring the intervention of IT professionals.

PRaaS, “Process oriented software” and BPO (Business Process Outsourcing)

Why promote PRaaS, another concept in our digital world already full of neologisms and acronyms?
There is one good reason to do so. I am convinced that this represent a significant innovation, which will play a key role over the next five years.

 

PRaaS lies at the confluence of three major movements:

Offshore BPOBPO, Business Process Outsourcing. For decades, companies have outsourced their “back office” to IT services providers, often located offshore in India, North Africa or Eastern Europe.

– The emergence of “Process Oriented Software” – software built around a process.
Cloud Computing, which provides software vendors with infinite, reliable and secure computing power at a very competitive cost.

US - Définition PRaaS 2 - BPO : Processiel:Cloud It is now possible to combine the advantages of BPO, “Process oriented software” and Cloud computing … in a PRaaS:

– An organization can accelerate its move towards BPO, using PRaaS, to handle more specialized process-oriented tasks, focusing more on “Front Office”.
– An organization that has a strong expertise in a specialized complex business process can develop and sell a powerful PRaaS to customers all around the world.
Amiando events US – Like Service channel, Amiando is another good example: this PRaaS supports the organisation of events and conferences. It has been used for more than 70,000 events, and the service is already available in English, French, German and Spanish.

– The Cloud provides an infrastructure that can accommodate these PRaaS, freeing PRaaS developers from performance constraints and heavy investments in infrastructures.
Here is another definition of PRaaS:

A PRaaS, or when BPO encounters a “Process Oriented Software” on the Cloud.
PRaaS, one more component of the Cloud Computing environment

The rapid development of PRaaS solutions will increase the attractiveness of Cloud Computing for organizations of all sizes and all sectors.

US - Iaas, PaaS, SaaS Today, within an organization, IT departments are the main partners
of Cloud players. They implement the three main components of the Cloud Computing:
– IaaS, Infrastructure as a Service = availability of resources such as servers or storage capacity. AWS, Amazon Web Services is a leader of the IaaS.
– PaaS, Platform as a Service = tools available for development teams, to write programs in Java, Phyton or other languages. Google App Engine or Force.com are two examples of PaaS.
– SaaS, Software as a Service. This is the best known component of the Cloud. Jeff Kaplan has been publishing for more than 2 years “SaaS Showplace“, a catalog which now contains more than one thousand SaaS entries.

US - Iaas, PaaS, SaaS, PraaS PRaaS, the fourth cloud component I am defining today, is the first one aimed directly at business managers within an organization.
This does not mean, however, that CIOs can’t play a useful role, by supporting businesses and helping these PRaaS interact with existing legacy applications.

It’s a major turning point in the history of computing. IT solutions become sufficiently “Industrialized” for business users and managers to be able to select, deploy and use them directly, without IT professionnals help.

Tools for building PRaaS

To complete this picture, let’s have a look at a family of tools that will complement SaaS and PRaaS: Software that can … help build PRaaS on the Cloud.
Whatever the quality and variety of SaaS / PRaaS solutions available, organizations will always need some flexibility to manage processes that are specific to their own way of working.
Lotus Notes/Domino has been, for 15 years, one of the best tool for these specific processes.

Incoming new tools, built for Cloud Computing, are still very young, but full of promises.
Let’s take the example of two French companies, that offer different approaches to build these “customized” PRaaS processes:
RMP pour PRaaSRunMyProcess (RMP): RMP is a Cloud based BPM solution; its help develop processes build on top of existing SaaS solutions in the enterprise. As an example, Revevol,(I am President of this consulting company) has used RMP to automate our Google Apps orders process. (Disclaimer: Revevol is a partner of RunMyProcess).

VDoc Software from Visiativ. I met them recently and find their approach very cleaver. Their tool allows users to quickly develop specialized autonomous process that can run on the Cloud. This will be a tool used primarily by consultants or organizations with a strong expertize in a specific activity. This tool will allow them to build … PRaaS!

The arrival of PRaaS is great news for all businesses using IT solutions.
Within five years, a large catalog of PRaaS will cover most of the generic business support processes.
This will give IT departments more time and resources to concentrate their energy on key core business processes, which will be used as tools for competitiveness and differentiation.

Bill Macnee Just before the publication of this post, I had many emails exchanges with Bill McNee, the President of Saugatuck, one of the best (in my view) market research organizations focusing on SaaS and Cloud Computing.
I strongly recommend that anyone interested in these topics subscribe to Saugatuck free newsletters.

While agreeing with me on the general ideas of this text, Bill was not sure we needed another acronym to define it. He feels we will have a hard time separating SaaS and PRaaS.  He gave me, however, very good examples of solutions Saugatuck has already covered in their reports which, in my view, are perfect … PRaaS, like:
BirchStreet, e-procurement for hotels and restaurants.
Ketera, for generic procurement management.

He made also an important comment on BPO and PRaaS; one of his ideas is that large BPO providers, like Infosys, will continue to manage the outsourced process of their large clients, but will rely, more and more, on PRaaS solutions to do it.

Anúncios

Where the smart grid meets the Internet

agosto 29, 2009

Eis aí um bom empurrão para a Internet no Brasil pela rede elétrica, que teve recentemente a aprovação da Aneel- Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica!

Nada mais nada menos do que o pai da Internet, Vincet Cerf escrevendo para http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/!

=============

Where the smart grid meets the Internet

Friday, August 21, 2009 at 3:07 PM Posted by Vint Cerf, Chief Internet Evangelist

The term “smart grid” means many things to many people. At the most basic level, the smart grid is defining smarter ways to deliver and use energy — but did you know that the smart grid is also defining new ways to generate and exchange energy information?

Building information technology into the electricity grid will revolutionize the way our homes and businesses use energy. The first step will be to develop open protocols and standards to allow smart grid devices and systems to communicate with one another. That’s why Google and other stakeholders are participating in a working group coordinated by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) to develop interoperability standards for a nationwide smart grid.

When people talk about networks for exchanging information — particularly among millions of end users — the first thing that often comes to mind is the Internet. So it makes sense to take the successful processes used to create Internet standards and apply them to this new energy information network.

Google, for example, believes in the wisdom of crowds (we’ve used that wisdom to enhance our products and we continue to get feedback on future products via Google Labs and Google Code Labs). And we’ve found that a good way to harness the wisdom of crowds is to create open standards to solve network issues. Some of the key principles to developing truly open standards include open and free access to:

  • Process. The customers of the smart grid information network are energy producers and consumers, hardware and software developers and energy regulators. Collaborate, and make sure all parties are represented during the standards discussion.
  • Drafts. There are a lot of people with networking expertise who are not directly involved with smart grid; make it easy for them to participate, for example, by hosting meetings online and posting documents that are universally accessible for review.
  • Comments. Allow comments resulting from current standards drafts to influence future drafts.
  • Final standards. If people can’t access the standard, they can’t implement the standard!
  • Standards unencumbered by patents. If implementers need to worry about licenses to practice the standard, it is not really a completely open standard.

The smart grid is essentially a nascent energy Internet. Thanks to the open protocols and standards on which it was built, the Internet has grown into a thriving ecosystem, delivering innovative products and services to billions of users worldwide. Applying the same principles of openness to the development of standards for our nation’s electric grid would create a smarter platform for products and services, helping consumers conserve energy and save money. 

Where the smart grid meets the Internet

Friday, August 21, 2009 at 3:07 PM

The term “smart grid” means many things to many people. At the most basic level, the smart grid is defining smarter ways to deliver and use energy — but did you know that the smart grid is also defining new ways to generate and exchange energy information?

Building information technology into the electricity grid will revolutionize the way our homes and businesses use energy. The first step will be to develop open protocols and standards to allow smart grid devices and systems to communicate with one another. That’s why Google and other stakeholders are participating in a working group coordinated by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) to develop interoperability standards for a nationwide smart grid.

When people talk about networks for exchanging information — particularly among millions of end users — the first thing that often comes to mind is the Internet. So it makes sense to take the successful processes used to create Internet standards and apply them to this new energy information network.

Google, for example, believes in the wisdom of crowds (we’ve used that wisdom to enhance our products and we continue to get feedback on future products via Google Labs and Google Code Labs). And we’ve found that a good way to harness the wisdom of crowds is to create open standards to solve network issues. Some of the key principles to developing truly open standards include open and free access to:

  • Process. The customers of the smart grid information network are energy producers and consumers, hardware and software developers and energy regulators. Collaborate, and make sure all parties are represented during the standards discussion.
  • Drafts. There are a lot of people with networking expertise who are not directly involved with smart grid; make it easy for them to participate, for example, by hosting meetings online and posting documents that are universally accessible for review.
  • Comments. Allow comments resulting from current standards drafts to influence future drafts.
  • Final standards. If people can’t access the standard, they can’t implement the standard!
  • Standards unencumbered by patents. If implementers need to worry about licenses to practice the standard, it is not really a completely open standard.

The smart grid is essentially a nascent energy Internet. Thanks to the open protocols and standards on which it was built, the Internet has grown into a thriving ecosystem, delivering innovative products and services to billions of users worldwide. Applying the same principles of openness to the development of standards for our nation’s electric grid would create a smarter platform for products and services, helping consumers conserve energy and save money.

Cartoonize-se!

agosto 29, 2009

 Dica do Prof. Mark Perry: cartoonize em http://www.befunky.com!

jccBeFunky

The very model of a modern central banker

agosto 28, 2009

Ben Bernanke dá orgulho à classe dos acadêmicos!

Congratulations!

===============
The very model of a modern central banker
Aug 27th 2009 | WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition
An academic background stood the chairman of the Federal Reserve in good stead during his first term. Political skills may be more important in his second
AP

AS THE financial crisis gathered force in August 2007, Jim Cramer, a hyperbolic market commentator on cable television, hurled the worst epithet he could muster at the chairman of the Federal Reserve: “Bernanke is being an academic. It is no time to be an academic!” By August 25th this year, when Barack Obama nominated Ben Bernanke to a second, four-year term, what had once been an epithet had become a source of strength. “As an expert on the causes of the Great Depression, I’m sure Ben never imagined that he would be part of a team responsible for preventing another,” Mr Obama said. “But because of his background, his temperament, his courage, and his creativity, that’s exactly what he has helped to achieve.”

It is too soon to declare that the threat of depression has passed, but not to conclude that Mr Bernanke’s academic background, which seemed a liability at the start of his tenure, has proved his greatest asset. His so far successful handling of the crisis reflects not just what he learned about the Depression, but what other economists have learned from studying crises—as demonstrated by the similar strategies other central banks have taken. A political neophyte compared with his predecessor, Alan Greenspan, Mr Bernanke made that a strength when he pleaded with politicians to bail out the system. “I’m a college professor,” he told Congress as it debated the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Programme. “I never worked on Wall Street… My interest is solely for the strength and the recovery of the US economy.”

Difficult as Mr Bernanke’s first term was, his next will be more politically treacherous. The recovery now under way will be feeble: deflation will remain a bigger threat than inflation for at least a year. Yet early signs of growth will generate pressure to tighten monetary policy which Mr Bernanke must beat back without seeming soft on inflation.

Once the recovery is entrenched and unemployment is falling, he will have to raise interest rates and shrink the Fed’s balance-sheet, inviting attack from Congress and perhaps Mr Obama. He will also have to create a new monetary regime to replace the single-minded focus on low inflation, says David Blanchflower, who recently quit the Bank of England’s monetary policy committee. The Fed may have to intervene in markets more to prevent new bubbles. But that, like tightening monetary policy, is unpopular and the Fed is already in bad odour with the public (see chart).

Still, Mr Bernanke is probably up to these challenges. Mr Obama has strengthened him immensely, by nominating the 55-year-old Republican long before his term expires rather than leaving him dangling or replacing him with a Democrat. More important, Mr Bernanke has shown he can adapt academic theory to the political reality in which the Fed operates.

This was not a foregone conclusion. Mr Bernanke was appointed to the Fed in 2006 largely on his academic credentials. As a professor at Princeton University, then a Fed governor under Mr Greenspan and briefly an adviser to George Bush, he helped build the edifice of macroeconomic orthodoxy that has proven so badly flawed. He argued that central banks performed best by concentrating solely on inflation, preferably with a target. To an even greater degree than Mr Greenspan, he was sure that using monetary policy to try to stop asset-price bubbles would do more harm than good.

To a great extent this reflected his and most macroeconomists’ assumption that markets were, most of the time, rational and efficient. In September 2005, he declared: “Recent house price increases are attributable mainly to economic fundamentals.” Jeremy Grantham, a fund manager, has said Mr Bernanke’s faith in efficient markets was so strong that he could not see a once-in-a-century bubble in home prices because such a bubble wasn’t supposed to be possible. Mr Greenspan is blamed for planting the seeds of the crisis by holding interest rates low after the 2001 recession, but Mr Bernanke provided ample intellectual cover for the strategy. As late as August 7th 2007, days before the crisis erupted, the Fed said it was more worried about inflation than about a weakening economy.

But once the gravity of the crisis became clear, Mr Bernanke knew what he had to do. Financial institutions, unsure who was fatally exposed to toxic securities, began to hoard liquidity (cash and super-safe government debt) and withhold credit from each other. As liquidity dried up, some institutions failed and others reduced their lending to businesses and households, starving the broader economy. When everyone wants liquidity, only the central bank can supply more. Over the next 20 months, Mr Bernanke employed ever more creative means to inject liquidity into the financial markets. He also used conventional monetary policy, eventually cutting short-term interest rates close to zero and attempting to lower long-term interest rates by purchasing bonds. But the Fed needed a functioning financial system to transmit the benefits of such actions to the broader economy.

He was not the only central banker to come to this realisation, or even the first. When the crisis first broke in August 2007, the European Central Bank (ECB) was more aggressive in its initial response, providing at first unlimited cash to euro-zone banks. Similarly, the Fed’s decision to throw its weight behind Bear Stearns, American International Group and Citigroup, had its analogues abroad: the Bank of England provided a lifeline for Northern Rock and the Swiss National Bank later backstopped UBS. All central bankers, not just those who are authorities on the Depression, know that in a crisis, the failure of a single financial firm can trigger contagion and the collapse of its counterparties, endangering the entire financial system and economy.

But Mr Bernanke not only acted more quickly and forcefully, he faced unique constraints. Almost by accident the ECB ended up with a modern toolkit: it can lend to far more counterparties against far more types of collateral than the Fed. Europe’s economy remains bank-dominated. America’s once was, too, and the Fed’s tools reflect that: it can ordinarily lend only to banks from its discount window. But America’s economy is now dominated by a shadow banking system of investment banks, financial firms and investment funds. Mr Bernanke’s staff devoted much of their creativity to overcoming the legal and technical barriers of the Fed’s 20th-century charter and, when they hit the limit, convincing Congress and the administration to pick up the baton.

Professional economists have applauded Mr Bernanke’s actions, but the public has not. The Fed’s approval rating stands at just 30%, lower than any other federal agency and down from 53% in 2003, according to Gallup. Partly this is because the economy has faced a devastating recession that the Fed was meant to prevent. But it also reflects discomfort with the Fed’s meddling in private markets.

Central bankers expect to be unpopular, but the Fed is uniquely vulnerable now. A bill in Congress would subject its most sensitive decisions to legislators’ scrutiny, while the administration has proposed expanding its regulatory oversight to contain future crises. This has thrust Mr Bernanke into the political arena: he appears to be at odds with Tim Geithner, the treasury secretary and a former colleague at the Fed, over his proposal to strip the central bank of its consumer-protection duties. Just one senator voted against his confirmation in 2006; between 10 and 25 from both parties may this time, though that will not deny him confirmation.

Mr Obama could have succumbed to partisan priorities as well. The Fed chairman wields enormous influence over all economic policy, not just monetary policy, and a Democrat has not held the job since 1987. Mr Obama had many qualified candidates, from Larry Summers, his adviser and a former treasury secretary, to Janet Yellen, president of the San Francisco Fed. The president went with Mr Bernanke to keep together two principal architects of the response to the crisis—the other is Mr Geithner—and to eliminate market suspicions that he wanted a pliable loyalist in the job. In doing so, he has helped assure Mr Bernanke’s legacy of making the chairmanship less political and more technical. You might even say academic.

Aneel traça regras para PLC

agosto 26, 2009

Do blog do jornalista Ethevaldo Siqueira (http://www.ethevaldo.com.br)!

============
Aneel traça regras para PLC

25 de agosto de 2009

Depois de alguns adiamentos, a diretoria da Aneel (Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica) aprovou hoje o regulamento sobre o uso da tecnologia PLC (Power Line Communications) que permite a transmissão de internet banda larga pela rede de energia elétrica. A Anatel (Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações) já havia aprovado normas sobre esse tipo de serviço em abril.

Estes são alguns dos pontos considerados na regulação:
– as empresas de energia não poderão oferecer serviços de comunicação diretamente, mas podem constituir subsidiárias para essa finalidade;
– as redes podem ser usadas também para transmissão de TV paga;
– o uso da tecnologia PLC não poderá interferir na qualidade de outros serviços, como a transmissão de eletricidade;
– a tecnologia poderá ser aplicada nos controles internos das distribuidoras de energia, como medição de consumo domiciliar e interrupção de ligações;

Além de proporcionar banda larga em altas velocidades, a tecnologia PLC vai favorecer moradores de localidades distantes, já que as redes elétricas estão presentes em praticamente todo o país.

Manufacturing Output Per Worker (USA) Hits Record High

agosto 22, 2009

Dados impressionantes do blog do Prof. Mark Perry (http://mjperry.blogspot.com/)  de hoje mostrando como a indústria americana não mais emprega!

=============

Manufacturing Output Per Worker Hits Record High

 

As I reported several days ago that manufacturing employment had fallen below 12 million jobs for the first time since 1941, and that manufacturing jobs as a percent of total employment fell below 9% (see chart above), the lowest percentage ever in BLS history (back to 1939).

The chart below shows manufacturing jobs and manufacturing output, using BLS data on manufacturing employment (data here) and Federal Reserve data on the dollar value of manufacturing output (data here), monthly back to 1972. The general trend over the last 40 years is clear: the U.S. has been producing more and more manufacturing output with fewer and fewer workers.

In fact, at the same time that U.S. manufacturing employment fell to a record low (as a share of the workforce), the productivity of manufacturing workers reached an all-time record high in July of $223,915 (in constant 2000 dollars) worth of output per worker (see chart below). That’s almost 3 times as much output per worker as in the early 1970s, and twice as much output per worker compared to the mid-1980s.
Bottom Line: More and more manufacturing output with fewer and fewer workers should be considered a positive trend for the U.S. economy, not a negative development. We should think of it the same way as the trend in farming over the last 150 years – we’re much better off as a country, with a much higher standard of living, with 3% of Americans working on farms compared to 150 years ago when about 65% of Americans toiled on farms. If we can continue to produce more manufacturing output with fewer workers, we’ll be better off as a country, not worse off.

Originally posted at Carpe Diem.

U, V or W for recovery

agosto 22, 2009

 Matéria da nova The Economist!

=============
U, V or W for recovery
Aug 20th 2009
From The Economist print edition
The world economy has stopped shrinking. That’s the end of the good news

IT HAS been deep and nasty. But the worst global recession since the 1930s may be over. Led by China, Asia’s emerging economies have revived fastest, with several expanding at annualised rates of more than 10% in the second quarter. A few big rich economies also returned to growth, albeit far more modestly, between April and June. Japan’s output rose at an annualised pace of 3.7%, and both Germany and France notched up annualised growth rates of just over 1%. In America the housing market has shown signs of stabilising, the pace of job losses is slowing and the vast majority of forecasters expect output to expand between July and September. Most economies are still a lot smaller than they were a year ago. On a quarterly basis, though, they are turning the corner.

This is good news. The first step in any recovery is for output to stop shrinking. But the more interesting question is what shape the recovery will take. The debate centres around three scenarios: “V”, “U” and “W”. A V-shaped recovery would be vigorous, as pent-up demand is unleashed. A U-shaped one would be feebler and flatter. And in a W-shape, growth would return for a few quarters, only to peter out once more.

Optimists argue that the scale of the downturn augurs for a strong rebound. America’s deepest post-war recessions, they point out, were followed by vigorous recoveries. In the two years after the slump of 1981-82, for instance, output soared at an average annual rate of almost 6%; and this time round, output has slumped even further, and for longer, than it did in the early 1980s.

Pessimists, meanwhile, think this downturn’s origins favour a weak recovery or a double-dip. Unlike typical post-war recessions this slump was spawned by a financial bust, not high interest rates, and when overindebted borrowers need to rebuild their balance-sheets and financial systems need repair, growth can be weak and easily derailed for years. Japan’s 1990s banking crisis left the economy stagnant for a decade; a premature tax increase in 1997 plunged it back into recession.

V for vulnerable

Neither of these parallels is exact, because today’s global slump combines several types of downturn and an unprecedented policy response. In formerly bubble economies, it is largely a balance-sheet recession. Debt-fuelled consumption has been felled. But the scale of collapse was broadened and deepened by the freezing up of the machinery of global finance, a dramatic collapse in confidence and stock-slashing. It was then countered with the biggest stimulus in history. The shape of the recovery depends on how these forces interact.

In the short term that shape could look beguilingly like a “V”, as stimulus kicks in and the inventory cycle turns. In emerging Asia, the unfreezing of trade finance, a turnaround in stocks and hefty fiscal stimulus are powering a rebound. Government support, especially employment subsidies and incentives toa buy new cars, has cushioned demand in Germany and France (see article). With export orders rising and confidence growing, the next few months could be surprisingly buoyant. Even in America, the fiscal stimulus is kicking in, the “cash for clunkers” scheme is a big, if temporary, prop to output and firms will, sooner or later, stop cutting inventories.

Yet a rebound based on stock adjustments is necessarily temporary, and one based on government stimulus alone will not last. Beyond those two factors there is little reason for cheer. America’s housing market may yet lurch down again as foreclosures rise, high unemployment takes its toll and a temporary home-buyers’ tax-credit ends (see article). Even if housing stabilises, consumer spending will stay weak as households pay down debt. In America and other post-bubble economies, a real V-shaped bounce seems fanciful. Elsewhere, it will happen only if vigorous private domestic demand picks up the baton from government stimulus. In Japan and Germany, where joblessness has further to rise, that seems unlikely any time soon. The odds are better in emerging economies, especially China. But even there an array of reforms, from a stronger currency to an overhaul of subsidies, is needed to boost labour income and encourage consumption. Until that shift takes place, the global recovery will be fragile and probably quite feeble. A gloomy U with a long, flat bottom of weak growth is the likeliest shape of the next few years.

Social Media Revolution

agosto 20, 2009

Um vídeo muito bom sobre Social Media Revolution.  A indicação veio de Vinicius Cardoso Garcia, na ferramenta A.M.I.G.O.S, do CESAR!

Matrix Is the Ladder to Success

agosto 20, 2009

Eu estou pesquisando aspectos de gestão empresarial para analisar porque as empresas (em sua maioria micro, pequenas e médias) de software no Brasil estão apresentando deseconomias de escala na produção (ver início da discussão aqui e aqui).

Tenho lido sobre a evolução do pensamento (teorias) administrativo/gerencial, sobre desenho de estruturas organizacionais, formas de organização, dentre vários outros temas.  No âmbito das estruturas organizacionais (onde tradicionalmente são localizadas as estruturais funcionais, de produto, de mercado, geográfica, matricial, basicamente) encontrei um artigo bastante interessante (abaixo) e que foi indicado por um especialista em gestão de estruturas matriciais (Kevan Hall), que criou o blog http://www.lifeinamatrix.com.

Vale a pena uma leitura pois o artigo foi editado neste mês de agosto como parte da Sala de Debates da revista Businessweek!

=========
Matrix Is the Ladder to Success

Multi-dimensional organizational design (Matrix) is the best way to restructure a business. Pro or con?

Pro: Look at the Track Record

by Jay R. Galbraith, Galbraith Management Consultants

Many companies are discovering they have no choice but to learn how to effectively execute a matrix organization. These companies operate with multiple business units in multiple countries. They distribute through multiple channels to different customer segments. In addition to the normal business functions, there are champions for each of these organizational dimensions. And very often these champions speak with equally strong voices.

If you are a company spending 4% or more on R&D, you will need a strong global business unit head to achieve the global scale and integration to profit from the R&D. If you are doing business in Brazil, China, and India, you are going to need strong government relationships and a strong country manager. When you need both strong businesses and strong countries, that’s when you need a matrix.

But does a matrix work? Yes, it does at the high performers like Procter & Gamble (PG), IBM (IBM), Nokia (NOK), Cisco (CSCO), and Schlumberger (SLB). These companies have moved beyond the usual debates about dotted lines. They have robust spreadsheet planning processes in which debates are resolved and joint goals are established. Collaborating teams create the plans.

The collaborators are rewarded while the old-school command and controllers leave. At Cisco, 20% of the management group left, and at P&G, it was 50%. These departures were positive changes, representing a victory of collaborators over the command and controllers. Management defines roles and responsibilities and holds people accountable. Managers rotate between units and prevent silos.

Most important, the successful companies have strong leadership teams that resolve disputes and create a one-company culture. Maybe there’s a matrix in your future.

Con: Matrix Impedes Progress

by Guido Quelle, Mandat GmbH

If you want to slow down your enterprise, all you have to do is introduce a matrix organization.

Leadership is the key driver to the success of a company. To ensure that leadership is more effective, you need organizational clarity, i.e., short decision paths, a smaller number of committees, and above all, an unequivocal allocation of responsibilities.

Matrix organizations feature exactly the opposite characteristics, which results in a high degree of complexity, unclear decision paths, unproductive agreement processes, and most worrisome, nontransparent responsibilities. Conflicts of competence are pre-programmed, and it is not clear who is responsible for successes and failures.

Matrix organizations blur responsibilities. Executives need to make decisions and accept responsibility. Matrix organizations, however, often suffer from fear of making mistakes in the face of the growing size of an organization.

In the past, companies such as ABB (ABB) and Unilever (UN) have shown that matrix organizations can do more bad than good. It was the matrix that nearly ruined ABB, and Unilever has been oscillating between different organizational designs since 1996.

An organization must serve the customer first. Having a matrix, you are not doing the customer a favor because decision processes are slowed. What kind of customer wants to talk to a sales representative who has no authority to decide on major aspects of the business relationship?

The last thing a company needs is an organization mainly driven by occupation with itself. Nearly all supposed advantages of a matrix organization can also be achieved by an intelligent line organization.

The Power of Story

agosto 16, 2009

Post interessante do palestrante Bert Decker, em seu blog: http://www.bertdecker.com!

=========

The Power of Story

At a recent speech the presenter before me started out with a story, followed by another, and another. All linked to points. Brilliant, and so rare in business presentations today. He warmed up the audience, and I was grateful.

 

“Story” is the S of our SHARP principles, Story is also the primary tool in making your message stick, as in Chip and Dan Heath’s great book “Made To Stick.” And in the vernacular of Malcolm Gladwell – story makes ANY idea stick, and if you haven’t read his great book get (“Blink”) 

 

The Top Ten Reasons stories are useful and powerful:

  • They are real
  • They are short
  • They are interesting
  • They are human
  • They give third party credibility
  • They are easy to tell
  • They are memorable
  • They are emotionally connecting
  • They move people
  • They are the principle communication tool since Man began talking

What Others Say


 

To be a person is to have a story to tell.
  -Isak Dinesen

 

The story is more important to me than the part.
   -Catherine Deneuve

 

 

 

 

Of course it’s the same old story. Truth usually is the same old story.
   -Margaret Thatcher

A compelling story, even if factually inaccurate, can be more emotionally compelling than a dry recitation of the truth.
  – Frank Luntz (Communication Specialist in language – also a political consultant)

 

Eighty percent of our life is emotion, and only 20 percent is intellect. I am much more interested in how you feel than how you think. I can change how you think, but how you feel is something deeper and stronger, and it’s something that’s inside you.
   – Frank Luntz

 

 

 

 

 

From Todd Paulsen, here is some of the power of story, and the reason behind it (see the complete article here):

“THE USE OF STORIES IS A POWERFUL TOOL that aids in material retention, but methodologies of inclusion are rarely discussed. The desire to share emotions and effect the emotional states of others drives us to tell and retell stories. A story is a vector that spreads the information and emotion that is contained within it. No classroom or teacher is needed past the initial storytelling. We have been doing this for years in the form of childrens stories.  It has been widely speculated that the story of Hantzel and Gretel (sic) is a cautionary tale used by elders to prevent children from wandering off into the dangers of the European forests alone.”

Jesus told stories and parables. He didn’t talk in concepts – he only needed stories, and he riveted peoples attention. Sowing seeds along the path, the rich young ruler, a house built on sand, faith growing like a mustard seed, and dozens more.

 

Remember, people buy on emotion and justify with fact.

A great resource for getting great at telling stories is Doug Stevenson’s Story Theatre – after our “Communicate To Influence” program this is one to take – it pays as a communicator to get serious about storytelling.


%d blogueiros gostam disto: